From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: error context for vacuum to include block number |
Date: | 2020-03-30 09:01:53 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1LLSGHgyOdRApxuJdMvXMChoCPHMqWetnUTEK0bPpjM1g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 5:03 AM Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:
>
Now that the main patch is committed, I have reviewed the other two patches.
v37-0002-Drop-reltuples
1.
@@ -2289,11 +2289,10 @@ vacuum_one_index(Relation indrel,
IndexBulkDeleteResult **stats,
/* Do vacuum or cleanup of the index */
if (lvshared->for_cleanup)
- lazy_cleanup_index(indrel, stats, lvshared->reltuples,
- lvshared->estimated_count, vacrelstats);
+ lazy_cleanup_index(indrel, stats, vacrelstats);
else
lazy_vacuum_index(indrel, stats, dead_tuples,
- lvshared->reltuples, vacrelstats);
+ vacrelstats);
I don't think the above change is correct. How will vacrelstats have
correct values when vacuum_one_index is called via parallel workers
(via parallel_vacuum_main)?
The v37-0003-Avoid-some-calls-to-RelationGetRelationName.patch looks
good to me. I have added the commit message in the patch.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v38-0001-Avoid-some-calls-to-RelationGetRelationName-and-.patch | application/octet-stream | 4.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2020-03-30 09:06:45 | Re: Possible copy and past error? (\usr\backend\commands\analyze.c) |
Previous Message | movead.li@highgo.ca | 2020-03-30 08:58:56 | wal_insert_waring_issue |